Missing the test 1DsmkIII vs FM vs 1DsMKII

[O.Olsson]

Hello Micheal.
I'm missing the test 1dsMKIII vs MF 1dsMKIIthat you where talking about a few weeks ago.
Is it coming soon or have you cancelled it.
I was also hoping for a more in depth test of the 1DsmkIII from you.  

Best regards.

[juicy]

Hi!

According to another thread the comparison is on it's way but takes probably 2 weeks (or something like that) before being published.

Patience, please...  

Cheers,
J

[O.Olsson]

Thank's
I was hoping for a it much earlier. if I understood it right the test was done 2 weeks ago.
Just sit tight and wait but I have my 1DsMKIII know and can do my own test if I think it is needed.
But it will be fun to read beacuse I think MR is one of the few who do test that are intresting.

Regards
O.Olsson

[spotmeter]

Nice write up on the Ds3 at Keith Coopers site, including unsharpened RAW's from that and the 5D.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article...notes.html#pics

[MarkKay]

I have been doing some comparisons.. 1dsmkIII and hasselbad H2 with aptus 65 back.  Here are a set of comparisons and discussion.
Macro lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/597769
PC and other lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/596985

There is no doubt that the leaf gives better image quality.  The resolution using the best canon lenses or the best 3rd pary lenses makes the differences less than i would have predicted. Nonetheless, the DR, tone transitions, and color accuracy still much better on the leaf.

I am curious to see what Michael's review states.  I am sure he has done more comprehensive studies.  Mark

[michael]

The comparison has had to be put on the back burner for a number of reasons, among them that my colleague Craig Samuels whom I've been counting on as a second pair of eyes in the evaluation phase is currently on a major commercial shoot in Hawaii (poor guy).

It'll come, but not all that soon I'm afraid. In the meantime the results are pretty much as one might expect. The MKIIIs is better than the MKIIs and the medium format backs are better that either Canon, though the IIIS is remarkably good in comparison. No surprises really.

Michael

[MarkKay]

I will post my latest comparison. THese are shots of a piece of petrified wood.  I used the canon 1DsmkIII with the leica 100mm macro and compared against the Hasselblad H2/leaf aptus 65 with the 120mm HC macro. I moved the camera to try to get the image area to be the same. The images were shot mirror lockup, with a remote shutter release f16, iso 100. I processed both in CS3 the same way except that for sharpening I used 0.25/0.5/0.25 for the leaf files and 0.5/0.5/0.5 for the canon. I did a very minimal levels adjustment to both and as the very last step I did a smart sharpen of 100/0.3 to both. The area of focus is just above the center green X i placed on the rock. The apparent DOF will be a little different due to moving the camera and the image size. First, I am showing both fields resized. The second images are 100% crops. The first in each set is the leaf then canon. I had similar results at f8. At f22, i got alot of diffraction issues with the leica.  I apologize for the duplicate posts. I tried to edit and delete the text but for reasons uknown to me, I get the post with the embedded images deleted--not the text only posts

[MarkKay]

I will post my latest comparison. I used the canon 1DsmkIII with the leica 100mm macro and compared against the Hasselblad H2/leaf aptus 65 with the 120mm HC macro. I moved the camera to try to get the image area to be the same. The images were shot mirror lockup, with a remote shutter release f16, iso 100. I processed both in CS3 the same way except that for sharpening I used 0.25/0.5/0.25 for the leaf files and 0.5/0.5/0.5 for the canon. I did a very minimal levels adjustment to both and as the very last step I did a smart sharpen of 100/0.3 to both. The area of focus is just above the center green X i placed on the rock. The apparent DOF will be a little different due to moving the camera and the image size. First, I am showing both fields resized. The second images are 100% crops. I had similar results at f8. At f22, i got alot of diffraction issues with the leica.

I have been doing some comparisons.. 1dsmkIII and hasselbad H2 with aptus 65 back.  Here are a set of comparisons and discussion.
Macro lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/597769
PC and other lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/596985

There is no doubt that the leaf gives better image quality.  The resolution using the best canon lenses or the best 3rd pary lenses makes the differences less than i would have predicted. Nonetheless, the DR, tone transitions, and color accuracy still much better on the leaf.

I am curious to see what Michael's review states.  I am sure he has done more comprehensive studies.  Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161123\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[MarkKay]

I will post my latest comparison. I used the canon 1DsmkIII with the leica 100mm macro and compared against the Hasselblad H2/leaf aptus 65 with the 120mm HC macro. I moved the camera to try to get the image area to be the same. The images were shot mirror lockup, with a remote shutter release f16, iso 100. I processed both in CS3 the same way except that for sharpening I used 0.25/0.5/0.25 for the leaf files and 0.5/0.5/0.5 for the canon. I did a very minimal levels adjustment to both and as the very last step I did a smart sharpen of 100/0.3 to both. The area of focus is just above the center green X i placed on the rock. The apparent DOF will be a little different due to moving the camera and the image size. First, I am showing both fields resized. The second images are 100% crops. I had similar results at f8. At f22, i got alot of diffraction issues with the leica.

I have been doing some comparisons.. 1dsmkIII and hasselbad H2 with aptus 65 back.  Here are a set of comparisons and discussion.
Macro lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/597769
PC and other lens comparison
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/596985

There is no doubt that the leaf gives better image quality.  The resolution using the best canon lenses or the best 3rd pary lenses makes the differences less than i would have predicted. Nonetheless, the DR, tone transitions, and color accuracy still much better on the leaf.

I am curious to see what Michael's review states.  I am sure he has done more comprehensive studies.  Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161123\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[MarkKay]

I will post my latest comparison. I used the canon 1DsmkIII with the leica 100mm macro and compared against the Hasselblad H2/leaf aptus 65 with the 120mm HC macro. I moved the camera to try to get the image area to be the same. The images were shot mirror lockup, with a remote shutter release f16, iso 100. I processed both in CS3 the same way except that for sharpening I used 0.25/0.5/0.25 for the leaf files and 0.5/0.5/0.5 for the canon. I did a very minimal levels adjustment to both and as the very last step I did a smart sharpen of 100/0.3 to both. The area of focus is just above the center green X i placed on the rock. The apparent DOF will be a little different due to moving the camera and the image size. First, I am showing both fields resized. The second images are 100% crops. The first image is from the leaf and the second is from the canon. I had similar results at f8. At f22, i got alot of diffraction issues with the leica.